About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
CNNW 15
CNN 12
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
KPIX (CBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 38
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)
story. this is backlash on capitol hill. this is criticism of the u.n. ambassador susan rice. it is now heating up as she meets with more republicans and faces more questions. we're going to have a live report up next. [ male announcer ] where do you turn for legal matters? maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at legalzoom.com today. and now you're protected. i'm going to dream about that steak. i'm going to dream about that tiramisu. what a night, huh? but, um, can the test drive be over now? head back to the dealership? [ male announcer ] it's practically yours. but we still need your signature. volkswagen sign then drive is back. and it's never been easier to get a passat. that's the power of german engineering. get $0 down, $0 due at signing, $0 deposit, and $0 first month's payment on any new volkswagen. visit vwdealer.com today. part of a whole new line of ta
they're troubled by what the united nations ambassador susan rice is telling them. and now the acting cia director has some serious problems as well. president obama pulls out all the stops to keep middle class taxes low, but will congress go along with higher taxes for the rich? plus, a long secret u.s. plan, get this, to explode an atomic bomb on the moon. what were they thinking? i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> today we may be at the tipping point for one of the most important decisions president obama needs to make as he begins his second term. on capitol hill republicans including moderate republicans are sending the president a clear warning, don't nominate susan rice to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. rice is the current u.s. ambassador to the united nations. she spent a second day meeting with senators trying to explain some of her inaccurate comments she made after the september 11th terrorist attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. cnn's senior congressional correspondent dana bash is joining us now from capitol hill with the ver
blame game that drew the president's ire, defending susan rice after comments by republican senators john mccain and lindsey graham that they would oppose her nomination to be secretary of state based on remarks she made about the benghazi attacks. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had received, and to besmerch her reputation is outrageous. >> indeed. let's get to our panel julian epstein, lynn sweet, washington bureau sweet for chicago "sun-times" and msnbc political analyst professor michael eric dyson of georgetown university. professor dyson,fy might begin with you, perhaps the most hated moment in that press conference was the president's barely concealed anger that republicans have been attacking ambassador susan rice for the confusion surrounding the benghazi consulate attacks. this, as you know, has been the drum beat from republicans from the right wing media for
.s. consulate in benghazi and said if you nominate susan rice to be secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination as senator graham said, he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that? >> well, first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are things that are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. a
the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. susan rice, who has been under a lot of criticism lately for the things she said after the benghazi attack in libya. and also with the top republican in the homeland security committee, senator susan collins of maine the republican from maine. we think that meeting might break up any minute while we're in this program live and if it does i'll interrupt what i am doing or about to do hopefully to have a few words with the good senator about how the meeting went. if it was anything like yesterday, ooh, didn't go so well with the senators she met with yesterday. so forgive me if i have to interrupt. i want to go back to the whole thing about office pools. i know a lot of you do this. you get in on these lotto winnings with your friends at work and if you actually win one of the big lotto pools with like oo other best friends at work you have what are you going to do? because one person has the ticket. right? sometimes they say oh, wait. that ticket? i bought that separately. i bought that one at home. that was from my private stash not from my pool. oh, well
diane feinstein defendeded u.n. ambassador susan rice. >> he made it clear that there was significant terrorist involvement. that is not my recollection of what he told us september 14th. >> to say that she is unqualified to be secretary of state i think is a mistake. and the way it keeps going, it's almost as if the intent is to assess nate -- >> joining me now is karen finny a political analyst and armstrong williams a conservative columnist and host of the right side with armstrong williams. hello to you both. good to see you. >> hi, alex. >> ladies first with you, karen. you just heard from congressman king. one of his biggest complaints was the white house held back information that this was a terrorist attack claiming this was classified. this is different from the white house's initial defense that they did call it a terrorist attack right away. are they changing their tune? >> well, what i find interesting is the way congressman king and a number of the other republicans have changed their tune from the night before the briefing and oh, what a difference it makes when you actu
the reputation of his united nations ambassador susan rice. much more cautious comments from the president about the david petraeus scandal and the fbi's investigation. we're covering all the angles of his first news conference since the election. and israel retaliates for rocket attacks with deadly strikes and extremist targets. now hamas is warning that the gates of hell have been opened. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> eight days after his re-election, president obama faced reporters in the midst of an unfolding scandal and with a potential economic crisis holding over his head. but he only got riled up when he responded to republican criticism of his united nations ambassador susan rice. more on that coming up. standby. but first, the president's careful responses about the investigation of this former cia chief david petraeus and on negotiations to avoid what's called the fiscal cliff. our white house correspondent jessica yellin was over at the east strip of the white house. you had a chance to speak to the president and ask him about that looming fiscal cliff. >> rep
. >> that leads us now to susan rice, the u.s. ambassador to the united nations who went on national television and said this attack in benghazi, libya, was probably because of this anti-muslim film. >> reporter: exactly. >> she had talking points, right? where did those talking points come from? did they come from petraeus and the cia, were they edited later by the white house, do we know? >> reporter: we don't know. you heard peter king was asked that specific question. according to him and some others, we still don't know exactly where the disconnect was, if you will, between what the intelligence community now says that they believed at the time and the talking points that ended up with susan rice that ended up on television that sunday afterwards. it still doesn't seem to be very clear. the reason why he is now the former cia director is because of the affair that david petraeus had. he resigned one week ago. the question is whether or not that would come up at all. he said it was addressed at the beginning and he regretted what happened and that they didn't really address it at all after
the whole white house. take a listen. >> so when the president says that susan rice was giving out -- talking about the most updated and -- fully documented intelligence that the intelligence community had, that's not true. >> last night the message was that susan rice was disseminating incorrect intelligence and the president is wrong for defending her. now here is mr. king today after an intelligence briefing. >> did he seem concerned that things had been changed? was that surprising to you? >> he seemed to say at the time they didn't realize the full significance of that and that or an unclassified statement it was acceptable. again, it's still very vague. >> petraeus told king today that, quote, for an unclassified statement this was acceptable. again, it's still very vague. dana, to paraphrase the president, republicans got out in front of their own skis on this one, didn't they? >> yes. well, in congress they have a tradition of revising and extending their remarks and i think peter king -- what peter king just said was "never mind." >> what he said earlier, what do we do wit
on the talking points, megan, which came from the cia, the famous talking points that supposedly susan rice relied on, they said talk came from cia, specifically mentioned al-qaeda and that al-qaeda was involved in the attack. and they left the cia, went to a whole process which i believe included the white house, and when the talking points were finalized all the the references to al-qaeda were taken out. >> and a lot to get through. let's start with greg. first of all, and petraeus testified under oath he knew within 24 hours it was al-qaeda or terrorism and this one, the talking points. >> i know, general petraeus is a wrecking crew right now. no one has done this much damage behind closed doors since ron jeremy and the question whether president obama was incompetent or hiding something and now we know, he's incompetent on hiding something. and we know that susan rice on talk shows was a big serving of baloney risotto. >> they protected the president by department the justice saying we didn't think it was important enough or a risk. >> they're covering it up because of the fact there wa
to make sure susan rice is nominated by the president, u.n. ambassador to be secretary of state, is that enough to make sure she's confirmed. >> i would be surprised if he nominated susan rice. although she probably would be confirmed, hearings would be a misery, a place where we would see again and again that she was the mouthpiece for a false story about what happened in benghazi. does the administration want to be held hostage to susan rice's overstatements of the case on tv multiple, multiple times. >> i don't know if you have inside information, everything i hear the president wants her to be the next secretary of state. >> she would be a strong nominee, excellent for this job. and if republicans want to go down the road of benghazi making it a political issue, we saw it play out in the campaign, not much success for them, it would be a strategic error to play politics with this issue and try to block susan rice with it. >> what about john kerry, rumored to replace panetta at the defense department. already calling the swift boat activity, saying he threw away his medals fr
controversial coming out of these briefings, whether or not susan rice, the u.n. ambassador -- the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., had the proper information or was correct in what she said publicly about the attack being probably at that point four days after the attack because of a demonstration. democrats are really to a person coming to her defense aggressively and trying to explain why there was a discrepancy. listen to kent conrad of the democratic member of the senate health care community. >> what is very clear is that ambassador rice used the talking points that the intelligence committee had all signed off on. that is very, very clear. she used the unclassified talking points that were signed off on by the entire intelligence community, so criticisms of her are completely unwarranted. that is very clear. >> and susan, dianne feinstein, just moments ago actually took out and read the unclassified talking points that susan rice used on that day, and they were very short. it sounds like there were two, maybe three points in the talking points, and it was almost certain to change.
's assessment, susan rice's assessment or your own assessment? >> i think what we first learned in the few hours and days immediately after the attack to today, the intelligence has evolved. certainly there was taking time to gather the information, to analyze it and put forward an assessment. what we do know is that when director petraeus came before us on the 14th, the information that he gave us was not the information that was put out by ambassador rice or by the administration. so it begs the question why wasn't a more complete picture given to the american public more quickly than it was? >> okay. you said that the intelligence has evolved, which means just from a layman's term, you would think that as they gathered information, they learned more than things would change. just from people sitting at home and not for partisans or for people who are on capitol hill, are you actually talk ing to each other about -- getting to the bottom of this or is everyone just talking at each other because i would imagine no administration wants anyone to die on their watch. >> certainly we are talking to
the killings in benghazi the u.s. ambassador to the united nations susan rice said what she said about the spontaneous reaction? >> well, i've always thought based on what we heard from the very start that there was a big disconnect between the information i thought i was looking at and what the president said yesterday they had. i thought the most interesting thing in the president's comments yesterday was that susan rice had all of the information they had and related all of that information. that just doesn't seem reasonable to me. if they did -- if that was all the information they had, i wonder why somebody at the white house wasn't asking more questions. and that may be the biggest question here as we go forward. >> are you with some of those republicans like senator mccain, senator lindsey graham who will do everything in their power to block her nomination as secretary of state if it goes forward? >> well, i think again, the question there is what did ambassador rice know? why is that what she knew? and why was she the person sent out to represent the administration? the presid
reporting says he's going to say and we've seen the cia talking points for susan rice,s as well, if he says listen immediately thought radical islamist group, same time there was intelligence that seemed to indicate that the video might have a role would that, would that explain to you what we now know about susan rice's testimony, which has become a big center of all of this, you know, talking certainly about, whether she's going to have a chance to be secretary of state, do does that make her position on "meept the press" five days later make some kind of sense? >> not to me. and everybody will have to judge that on their own. to me it still falls way short. we know, we know the events that happened. those are public, it's in the public domain. and to blame a video, i think, is offensive, not only to our own, you know, constitutional belief in freedom of speech, but just the idea that the administration would go out and blame a video, instead of what really happened, that this was a terrorist attack that killed four americans. so no i don't think it gets anybody off the hook for statement
.n. susan rice going to be secretary of state, that could be a very ugly confirmation hearing. and senator john kerry talked about as defense secretary, wolf? >> yeah, there's been reports that john kerry, who i always assumed wanted to be secretary of state could be the next secretary of defense leon panetta has made it clear he's ready to move on and go back to california after all these years in washington, former cia director, now the secretary of defense. i don't know how long that will last. but if kerry is nominated to be the secretary of defense, that does leave hillary clinton's job at the state department open. and susan rice was always -- at least i always believed she was the front-runner until those controversial comments she made about the benghazi killing of the u.s. ambassador and three other americans on those five sunday talk shows. and the republicans really have been going after her. and if the president stands firm and nominates her to be the next secretary of state, it will be a bruising confirmation hearing, there's no doubt about that. my p sense is, he probably wan
that there is support for secretary rice that is susan rice, the u.n. ambassador for the united states, for taking the position had she leaves of hillary clinton as secretary of state. and that name, susan rice, has been bandied about for quite a long time, but now, you know, the drumbeat is increasing and secretary clinton, remember, has said she will leave at the end of the term, that would mean january, but she's also indicated that she might stick around until the president is able to replace her and that would mean, of course, that the president would have to nominate someone and that person would a have to get through the senate. that's where the plot thickens because susan rice, as we all know, is part of this unfolding saga about benghazi and the attack that killed the u.s. ambassador and other americans in libya. so she has been blamed a lot, of course, for coming out and saying that those attacks, that attack was spurred by a video and then later on the administration said that it was terrorism. that could set her up for some really tough times in hearings up on capitol hill, in front of
susan rice. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. >> reporter: republicans have gone after rice for her statements made after the attack on the u.s. diplomatic mission in benghazi. five days after the violence that killed ambassador chris stevens and three other americans, she attributed it to outrage in the arab world over an anti-muslim video and not an act of terrorism. >> but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had received and to besmirch her reputation... is outrageous! >> reporter: senator mccain has vowed to block rice's nomination should the president choose her to replace secretary of state hillary clinton. mccain and graham are also calling for a special watergate- style investigation into the benghazi attack. >> we want to probe everybody involved all the way up to and including the president of the united states. >> this is about the role she played around four
, keeping that in mind, those who talk to me say the following. that u.s. ambassador susan rice has supporters inside the white house to become secretary of state. if she were to go for that job, if she were to be nominated, obviously, she would have a bruising confirmation battle, but people believe she would ultimately get confirmed. do they want that fight is a question and how would that affect the rest of the chess pieces? senator john kerry, who chairs the senate foreign relations committee, has, it's been widely known, long wanted to be secretary of state. if susan rice gets the state nomination, he could be put up for secretary of defense. or not. he says he's right now focused on his job in the senate. another possibility is the president has said he would lake to have a bipartisan cabinet. defense is a good place to put a republican, a republican such as former senator chuck hagel, for example. that's just one name i've heard bandied about. or you could put that person at cia. although the talk is that john brennan, the current homeland security adviser, is the man who cou
on september 14th was general petraeus saying it was not a terrorist attack. why did susan rice carry that out. the president can't have it both ways. >> hmm. well, the bitter back and forth continues. the house intelligence committee is holding a closed door hearing on the attack that killed u.s. ambassador chris stevens and three other americans. more on the fallout from the libya attack. want to bring in dana bash, and, dana, you have been watching, staking outle intelligence committee hearing. there is reports i guess that there might be a videotape or something. do we know that there is a tape, surveillance tape, that exists of the attack? do we know that? >> well, this comes from our national security correspondent, suzanne, kelly who is reporting that what is going on behind those closed doors. it'seen going, on this t intelligence officials brought with them closed-circumstance yult video which from the compound that was recovered from the compound that, of course, was attacked in benghazi, and they're playing it for these lawmakers and the point, according to suzanne's sources, is to
points used by u.n. ambassador susan rice in the days after the attack. >>> talks on the looming fiscal cliff begin this morning at the white house. president obama has invited the four top leaders in congress, john boehner, nancy pelosi, harry reid and mitch mcconnell to try and strike a deal to protect the economy. >>> texas congressman ron paul gives what is likely his final speech in front of congress. in a 4-minute speech the republican libertarian slammed both parties saying they're leading the country in the wrong direction. >> the financial crisis is actually a moral crisis. many are acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few understand it's in reality a moral crisis. it's the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth of illegal government power. >> congressman paul is stepping down from his seat in congress at the end of the year. >>> thanksgiving travel around the corner. who will see the worst of the weather? meteorologist alexandra steele joins us now from atlanta. >> hi. or the best of it. actually, pretty benig
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)